Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    March 2, 2012 10:00am-10:30am PST

10:00 am
10:01 am
>> call the meeting to order. before we get started, i wanted to introduce the new appointee. he is a distinguished litigator here in san francisco. we look forward to serving with you. we will take role. [role call] the first item on the agenda is public comment in the jurisdiction of the ethics
10:02 am
commission. seeing no public comment, next is the proposed amendments for the public library. >> the commission is considering the draft amendments. there is a staff memo regarding this, and what we have done is set for the changes the commission talked briefly about ,. we would keep these provisions
10:03 am
except for the leading headnote employee a publisher for database or a publisher who sells books for the library. i know the deputy city librarian it is also here. >> you have any comments you would like to make before we discuss the issue? it does appear the staff has revived the language as we
10:04 am
discussed at our last meeting. any comments with respect to that? >> thank you. i am looking first at item d on page 3, which relates stearin exhibitions booked on to the library, and if i read the discussion correctly, it focused on exclusively the on boy, and i am wondering if that is a specific arrangement the library feels comfortable with and wants not to burden exhibits through that organization or whether it was an example of a larger
10:05 am
category. if it is the first, i wonder if it might be simpler to leave the provision in place and simply do an advance determination about that entity, that is a nonprofit is used to dealing with, but it has a history of reading that it has a history of collaboration that it seems like we were involved in either creating or wanted to have a comfortable path awaway, and the reason i as because i could see some potential downside to other exhibits people work on for the library where there was a and compensation for the exhibits being shown there that might be problematic.
10:06 am
one way is to say is it an example the happens with different organizations, or is this something we would hate to burden because it is working well and we expect this kind of collaboration, so i think that is a question for the librarian. >> i am the city librarian, so for your question about the exhibit, i think our recommendation to remove the section is just one example and that to us exhibits is quite a small part of our operation. a much bigger part where we work with vendors and have funds exchanged is through our collection, so we are much more focused on that. in addition, all of our exhibits those throwugh of funding process, and a large number do
10:07 am
not have funding exchange. there is a large number of the community that wants to cut something on display, and -- to put something on display, so i think your question, it is a category. we did not feel it should be called out. if there is a specific concern it could be thrown in with a larger umbrella statement, and to call it out makes it seem it is a bigger problem or a bigger issue. we were concerned about the fact that is not the only exhibit group in town, we have other examples that came forward and have to do with nonprofit entities, that a staff member was an artist at the time can display their arct through the non-profit, does it prohibit it
10:08 am
to be put in a library as part of an entity? there were multiple smaller examples, not just an on void. -- n envoy. >> were there any for-profit entities? >> i did not bring any examples, and i cannot think of any of the top of my head. other entities such as museums, and mostly nonprofit, but i would need to confirm that. >> i have a further issue about being employed iroore compensatd
10:09 am
as an instructor. what i am wondering is whether staff of the san francisco public library are working through this company or any other companies to provide training to employees of the san francisco public library, or is the example working to provide training. >> that is a good example. because we are a specialized library, we are often called upon to do training statewide, and our practice has always been that if it is done on non- work time, staff may or may not choose to be compensated because they are working out of the library. it may be that they get
10:10 am
permission to do this as part of their work. >> would there be a point when they would be asked whether the san francisco library would be aware whether the person was doing training they had developed, for example, internally for their own colleagues to train people, that some external entities as you are knowledgeable and incapable of giving the training, would you give its through some place else? >> i am not aware, but i can imagine it, and i know if they developed a training as part of the work they would ask for permission to share that with other entities and would not be
10:11 am
compensated for that. >> or perhaps the library would seek to be compensated for that, but that is a different question for another day. >> i think a part of our mission is instruction, and it is not just to provide access to material but to teach them how to use it, so instruction is an important part. this came up last time we discuss this. but is why the issue came up. we want our staff to be providing instruction to our colleagues and to the community. >> who makes the decision to hire training entities for the san francisco public library commoor is this automatically un training resources?
10:12 am
>> we use a variety of resources. they use training internally. >> i am the human-resources director, and we have a training officer. athe training office would seeka vendor that would offer the specific type of training and we are interested in. >> isn't a training officer that makes -- is it a training officer that makes all the decisions? >> most of the decisions you're good -- most of the decisions. four h r training, she would consult with me, and we would make a decision on for training with staff.
10:13 am
>> and one of the things that concerns me is that our library has a stellar reputation not just in california but across the country, and i would be concerned that we would prevent library's staff from participating in training with other institutions, because that adds to the institution, and that is something we should add, but i would hate to prevent that opportunity for other library employees. >> i want to add more information, but we do a training plan, so it is around what topics we will be training, what our priorities are, and the training officer uses that to identify appropriate trainers
10:14 am
within those topics. commissioner liu: i want to go back to subsection d. it does make reference about how there is a different guideline that directs how exhibits are playced on the library. can you educate us on what that process is and whether staff is involved? >> certainly pure good -- certainly. we have two main documents. one is the guidelines and the other is the exhibition policies. it basically speaks to the role of the library in tying in with our mission to provide access as
10:15 am
broadly as possible to diverse audiences. the guidelines explain that the fifth paragraph talks about selection criteria for individuals engaged in a wide range of activities. this is evaluated on a set of criteria that is listed, and they are a evaluated by a staff as well as our committee to plan not exhibitions -- plan exhibitions and then devise proposals, and we typically die them in with the same topics, such as in february we just finished black history month. it is done by of staff group,
10:16 am
and they review it to make sure we are capturing a wide audience, and it talks a little did send -- talks a little bit about the right to select items or not to select items, because we have to of the leeway to select and based on what topical interest we are trying to satisfy. >> thank you. is the exhibit a committee? >> it is called the exhibition committee, and they meet quarterly. places like the smithsonian are often schedule way in advance.
10:17 am
>> are they the ones that work on the exhibition? >> there is a committee staff in the exhibition units, and they are curators. they are the ones who implement the show as well as deal with the vendor, so they deal with the contracts. they deal with reporting similar to a museum. >> any other questions? i have a hypothetical and maybe for the staff and city attorney's office, but i assume if someone were to be hired as a consultant not for pay, and that organization wanted to be an exhibition is at the library, that person could not play any
10:18 am
part in the role to bring that new exhibition in, right? >> yes, generally speaking, under the contrast of interests, you cannot engage in a governmental decision that affects your financial interest, so if you were a consultant at the library you would not be able to engage in decision making involving those decisions. >> any other questions? thank you very much. public comment on this matter who? >> i cannot believe we are talking about this again.
10:19 am
i am in support of adopting these changes. i appreciate the attached copies of the policies, and i've previously requested they be hyperlinks on the final version. i assume that can happen. if those are the terms, maybe having the word development, that would be good. on page 3, this appears to be a typo. and what was section e it looks like a subsection there was nothing there. >> it is an automatic thing. >> we have people who do these things?
10:20 am
>> it is an automatic thing on the machine. >> can we blame bill gates on this? the library does a wonderful job, and thank you very much. >> what was the third change you asked about? >> page 1 it says policy and collection plan. i do not want to have it confused with something else. thank you. >> we can fix that part? >> i would have to check with the library to see what the names are. >> 5 was an oversight internally. we can add that. >> thank you.
10:21 am
>> was there additional public comment? >> my name is andrea grimes. i am a librarian at the main library. i want to give some staff input. the libraries-has had lots -- the library staff has had lots of impact. we have worked very well with the administration on making changes, on making recommendations, and also making sure everyone knows this is overrated document that would work very well in benefiting the public in coupling this document with our professional code of
10:22 am
ethics, so the library community has professional ethics and apply to our jobs and the work we do. for my job there is also a professional ethics for special librarians. all of these really add up to a really good as set of policies, and i am very happy this document will hopefully be approved by you because this is another thing that will hopefully help us do our job well. >> is there a motion to approve isa? >> so moved. >> all in favor? the motion passes. the next item on the agenda --
10:23 am
thank you for your time. the next item is a request for a waiver. would you like to introduce it? >> the former legislative aide have asked the commission to grant a waiver for the restrictions set forth in the campaign on government conduct code. goothere is a memo regarding th, and i am happy to answer any questions. >> the you have any remarks you would like to make? >> yes, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak this evening, and thank you for reviewing the materials and the
10:24 am
addendum i sent. i presume you got both of those. i know you have read my background and understand it pretty well, so i will be quick about the reason i am here before you, and i will move on to talking about what unfair influence and advantage means in the second half of my presentation. i worked for supervisor mirkarimi for 10 months after my experience as a journalist. my job ended on january 7. i hope when i took the job this would be a career transition and that i would move into working in government service for a city agency or department.
10:25 am
it turned out there is extraordinarily limited hiring. because of the economy and tight budget, there are a not -- there are not a lot of things available right now, so i am unemployed, and i am working for work full time and part-time if i can get it. a natural fit for me as public affairs work, and with the city because of my understanding of city government and the rules and procedures inherent to city government. a ban puts me at a severe disadvantage because i could not -- i could encounter a client who may not know whether or not they want a
10:26 am
representative when they are talking to me, and to come to a potential client with a liability like that, to have that for a year is extreme hardship. just a quick reiteration of the reasons i do not believe a waiver would create a potential for unfair advantage, i worked ufor the supervisor at the end f his tenure who has now moved to a narrowly focused elected rule with minimal influence except over law enforcement matters. i mostly interacted with other legislative aides and nine lower-level staff, and rarely the decision makers themselves,
10:27 am
as most who legislative aides do. all of the matters i sought to be approved are completed or discontinued, and i think that is important to keep in mind specifically, because this is a one-year ban o, and i presume it had something to do with the writers of the lobbying concern that issues would still be outstanding, the legislative aide have some special knowledge about some special relationship as i mentioned in my letter, i was working on a plastic bag ban legislation that had one vote. it's now had its second vote. that was the last one that i'm aware of that had supervisor mirkarimi's name on it. to move on, i've had no previous or outside political contacts and i'm not associated with any
10:28 am
politically influential group in the city or individual, in that regard. i was never a political fundraiser, donor, or a member of a political advocacy political association, community group, association or any entity organized to gain influence over governmental decisions and i am not now. i have not worked in a campaign in a substantial way and not made a contribution to a campaign in this city. the one-year will restrict employment options while i wait for an opening in a city department which will take an unknown amount of time. i've been unemployed for nearly two months now and i believe i'll have a challenge finding contract consulting work with the one-year ban imposed on me. that's the background. i just, because i understand a broad waiver is a relatively new proposal to the commission, i wanted to provide more
10:29 am
information as i did in my addendum about the terms that are pivotal in making a decision on granting a waiver or not. i just wanted to reiterate that the commission must give consideration to the waiver as much as it does to the ban itself because if it were the rule that by definition legislative aides had undue influence and unfair advantage because they had been legislative aides for a year, then the waiver of the ban would be irrelevant and we wouldn't be talking about it. the commission must analyze whether a waiver would create a potential for undue and unfair advantage and as i said in mya, dundum to my letter, not just the possibility whether there exists a potential for any influence or advantage and that's where the context of a governmental environment, and particularly city hall, are extraordinarily important to keep in mind when you make your decision.